Limits...
Individual and interactive effects of drought and heat on leaf physiology of seedlings in an economically important crop

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the combined effect of drought and heat wave on physiological responses of tomato seedlings. We found that the negative impacts of drought stress were exacerbated by heat wave through stomatal and biochemical limitations. Additionally, the recovery of leaf gas exchange in the combination of drought and heat wave was delayed more than in other treatments. Our results suggest that future climates characterized by drought and extreme heat may have substantial impacts on tomato productivity and survival.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

The recovery following drought of (A) leaf water potential (Ψl), (B) leaf photosynthesis under saturating light (Asat), (C) stomatal conductance (gs) and (D) transpiration (E) of Solanum lycopersicum seedlings grown under ambient temperature and 7-d 42 °C heat wave treatments. Values are means ± SE (n = 4). Hours represent 0, 1, 2, 8, 24 h after the recovery from drought. Treatments: AD–Ambient temperature plus drought; HD–Heat wave plus drought.
© Copyright Policy - cc-by
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5391698&req=5

plw090-F5: The recovery following drought of (A) leaf water potential (Ψl), (B) leaf photosynthesis under saturating light (Asat), (C) stomatal conductance (gs) and (D) transpiration (E) of Solanum lycopersicum seedlings grown under ambient temperature and 7-d 42 °C heat wave treatments. Values are means ± SE (n = 4). Hours represent 0, 1, 2, 8, 24 h after the recovery from drought. Treatments: AD–Ambient temperature plus drought; HD–Heat wave plus drought.

Mentions: The leaf water potential had a fast recovery from drought, returning to well watered control values in about 8 h after rehydration, similarly in AD and HD treatments (Fig. 5A, Table 2). Nevertheless, leaf gas exchange was not fully recovered even after 24 h rehydration (Fig. 5B–D, Table 2), reflecting the hysteresis in the response of leaf gas exchange to leaf water potential. More interestingly, after 24 h recovery, Asat, gs and E in AD was 210 %, 260 % and 214 % higher than those in HD treatment, respectively, suggesting that heat wave delayed the recovery of leaf gas exchange. These results are explained in Fig. 6, which shows leaf gas exchange as a function of leaf water potential during drought stress and the 24-h recovery from drought. As leaf water potential declined (i.e. to more negative values), gas exchange exhibited similar reductions between AD and HD treatment. After rehydration, however, seedlings in AD treatment exhibited sharper recovery of leaf gas exchange, particularly when leaf water potential was higher than -1 MPa. Generally, these results suggest that despite the fast recovery of leaf water potential, the recovery of leaf gas exchange lagged, to an even greater degree in HD treatment than AD treatment, suggesting the coordination of leaf gas exchange and leaf water potential was shifted between AD and HD treatments.Figure 5


Individual and interactive effects of drought and heat on leaf physiology of seedlings in an economically important crop
The recovery following drought of (A) leaf water potential (Ψl), (B) leaf photosynthesis under saturating light (Asat), (C) stomatal conductance (gs) and (D) transpiration (E) of Solanum lycopersicum seedlings grown under ambient temperature and 7-d 42 °C heat wave treatments. Values are means ± SE (n = 4). Hours represent 0, 1, 2, 8, 24 h after the recovery from drought. Treatments: AD–Ambient temperature plus drought; HD–Heat wave plus drought.
© Copyright Policy - cc-by
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC5391698&req=5

plw090-F5: The recovery following drought of (A) leaf water potential (Ψl), (B) leaf photosynthesis under saturating light (Asat), (C) stomatal conductance (gs) and (D) transpiration (E) of Solanum lycopersicum seedlings grown under ambient temperature and 7-d 42 °C heat wave treatments. Values are means ± SE (n = 4). Hours represent 0, 1, 2, 8, 24 h after the recovery from drought. Treatments: AD–Ambient temperature plus drought; HD–Heat wave plus drought.
Mentions: The leaf water potential had a fast recovery from drought, returning to well watered control values in about 8 h after rehydration, similarly in AD and HD treatments (Fig. 5A, Table 2). Nevertheless, leaf gas exchange was not fully recovered even after 24 h rehydration (Fig. 5B–D, Table 2), reflecting the hysteresis in the response of leaf gas exchange to leaf water potential. More interestingly, after 24 h recovery, Asat, gs and E in AD was 210 %, 260 % and 214 % higher than those in HD treatment, respectively, suggesting that heat wave delayed the recovery of leaf gas exchange. These results are explained in Fig. 6, which shows leaf gas exchange as a function of leaf water potential during drought stress and the 24-h recovery from drought. As leaf water potential declined (i.e. to more negative values), gas exchange exhibited similar reductions between AD and HD treatment. After rehydration, however, seedlings in AD treatment exhibited sharper recovery of leaf gas exchange, particularly when leaf water potential was higher than -1 MPa. Generally, these results suggest that despite the fast recovery of leaf water potential, the recovery of leaf gas exchange lagged, to an even greater degree in HD treatment than AD treatment, suggesting the coordination of leaf gas exchange and leaf water potential was shifted between AD and HD treatments.Figure 5

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

ABSTRACT

This study investigated the combined effect of drought and heat wave on physiological responses of tomato seedlings. We found that the negative impacts of drought stress were exacerbated by heat wave through stomatal and biochemical limitations. Additionally, the recovery of leaf gas exchange in the combination of drought and heat wave was delayed more than in other treatments. Our results suggest that future climates characterized by drought and extreme heat may have substantial impacts on tomato productivity and survival.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus